251–260 of 329 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it reads like humiliation fetish material honestly. I'd delete my account but he just doubles down.
He's doing it elsewhere too: https://github.com/rerun-io/rerun/pull/11900#issuecomment-35... https://github.com/ocaml/dune/issues/12731 https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl/pull/180 Seems he's just on a rampage of "fixing" issues for trendy packages to get some attention.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would you be unwilling to merge AI code at all? Are you leaving the third-party aspect out of your question on purpose? Not GP but for me, it pretty much boils down to the comment from Mason[0]: "If I wanted an LLM to generate [...] unreviewed code [...], I could do it myself." To put it bluntly, everybody can generate code via LLMs and writing code isn't what defines the dominant work of an existing project an…
I'm strictly talking about the 10-line Zig PR above. Well-documented and tested.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm strictly talking about the 10-line Zig PR above. Well-documented and tested.
That's certainly a way to avoid questions... I mean sure, but everybody else is talking about how your humongous PRs are a burden to review.
Now, what's your question?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of that matters. The header is there, in writing, and discussed in the PR. It is acknowledged by both parties and the author gives a clumsy response for its existence. The PR is simply tainted by this alone, not to mention other pain points. You may not consider this problematic. But maintainers of this project sure do, given this was one of the immediate concerns of theirs.
It matters because it completely weakens their point of stance and make them look unreasonable. Header is irrelevant since it isn't copyright infringement, and FWIW when it has been corrected (in the MR), then they decided that the MR is too complex for them and closed the whole issue. Ridiculous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes? That is why some people are forbidden to contribute to projects if their eyes have read projects with incompatible licenses, in case people go to copyright court.
Yes what? Both oxcaml and ocaml have compatible LGPL licenses so I didn't get your argument. But even if that hadn't been the case, what exactly would be the problem? Are you saying that I cannot learn from a copyrighted book written by some respected and known author, and then apply that knowledge elsewhere because I would be risking to be sued for copyright infringement?
Which raises the question how many other important incorrect details are buried in the 13k lines of code that you are unaware of and unable to recognise the significance of? And how much mantainer time would you waste being dismissive of the issues?
People have taken the copyright header as indicative of wider problems in the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Central to it being that you consider it unjust. The other option is to take into consideration the perspective of the maintainers, find their feedback to be just and then decide whether you want to contribute in the manner that they expect or you're not ready to do that kind of work. You don't have to stop loving a project just because you're not ready to put in the work that the maintainers expect you to put in. Wh…
> Central to it being that you consider it unjust. I assume this is a correct characterization of how joelreymont feels about the fact that his PR was rejected.
I feel completely different about my Zig PR [1] but, hey, it's not my playground and the Zig folks seem to be particularly opinionated.
[1] https://ziggit.dev/t/bug-wrong-segment-ordering-for-macos-us...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It matters because it completely weakens their point of stance and make them look unreasonable. Header is irrelevant since it isn't copyright infringement, and FWIW when it has been corrected (in the MR), then they decided that the MR is too complex for them and closed the whole issue. Ridiculous.
An incorrect copyright header is a major red flag for non technical reasons. If you think it is an irrelevant minor matter then you do not undesirable several very important social and legal aspects of the issue.
I understand that people are uncomfortable with this, I am likely too, but objectively looking there's technically nothing wrong or different to what humans already do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes what? Both oxcaml and ocaml have compatible LGPL licenses so I didn't get your argument. But even if that hadn't been the case, what exactly would be the problem? Are you saying that I cannot learn from a copyrighted book written by some respected and known author, and then apply that knowledge elsewhere because I would be risking to be sued for copyright infringement?
The wider point is that copyright headers are a very important detail and that a) the AI got it wrong b) you did not notice c) you have not taken on board the fact that it is important despite being told several times and have dismissed the issue as unimportant Which raises the question how many other important incorrect details are buried in the 13k lines of code that you are unaware of and unable to recognise the s…
It's the same as if your colleague sitting next to you would not allow the MR to be merged for various political and not technical reasons - this is exactly what is happening here.
I'm the author of the PR. No, I'm not AI or bot, etc. Yes, my resume is genuine and is even more weird than what was listed (see https://joel.id/resume ). Oh, and I live in Kyiv. As for the PR itself, it was a PR stunt that I regret now as the code works and solves a real problem (at least for me!). I'll probably redo it, once I have spare Claude $$$ which I'm using for other projects now ( https://joel.id/build-your…
A list compiler should be relatively straightforward, as these things go. If you get the AI to write it you should actually read it, all of it, and understand it, to the point where you can add features and fix bugs yourself. There are many many resources on the subject. Only after this should you consider contributing to open source projects. And even then you need to be able to read and understand your contributions
I'm the author of the PR. No, I'm not AI or bot, etc. Yes, my resume is genuine and is even more weird than what was listed (see https://joel.id/resume ). Oh, and I live in Kyiv. As for the PR itself, it was a PR stunt that I regret now as the code works and solves a real problem (at least for me!). I'll probably redo it, once I have spare Claude $$$ which I'm using for other projects now ( https://joel.id/build-your…